In his second attempt to win the Republican presidential nomination, Ron Paul is coming up short, based on the “official” delegate count so far. However, with several state conventions yet to decide the actual delegates from the caucus states, Ron Paul may have more delegates waiting in the wings to lift the number of delegates he will have at the Tampa convention in August and possibly be a kingmaker if no one has 1,144 delegates to win the nomination on the first ballot.
And with primaries in Texas, California and New York coming up in the next couple of months, a Ron Paul surge is not out of the question in the last few weeks of the primary season as more and more GOP voters realize that he is the only candidate who has solutions to end the bipartisan big government policies in Washington D.C.
Nevertheless, on Super Tuesday the Paul campaign—and his supporters—were disappointed he did not win three caucuses, Alaska, Idaho and North Dakota, where he campaigned extensively and was met with huge and enthusiastic crowds. Instead, Dr. Paul finished second in North Dakota, in a virtual tie for second in Idaho and third in Alaska. Again, there is anecdotal evidence that the GOP establishment did “its thing” to hold down the Paul vote at some of the precincts.
But by not winning any of the 23 primaries or caucuses the mainstream media will now marginalize Ron Paul’s candidacy even more, if that is possible. Already, in the post-Super Tuesday reporting of the GOP presidential race, Ron Paul is not being mentioned in most articles (New York Times, Wall Street Journal. etc.) I have read in the past two days. In other words, the MSM now have “proof” that Ron Paul cannot win the GOP presidential nomination, and therefore they can rationalize not covering him let alone mention him in articles about the GOP primary.
This MSM’s lack of coverage of the Ron Paul campaign is one reason he has not fared as well as the other candidates who have surged and crashed since the beginning of the primary campaign. By not getting any respectful coverage by the MSM, by that I mean not being considered a “contender” for the GOP nomination, but instead being protraayed as engaging in a quixotic quest to change America, reporters have asked Dr. Paul repeatedly about running as a third party candidate and whether he would support the eventual GOP nominee, thus planting in voters’ minds that he will not win the GOP presidential nomination and therefore voting for him would be a “wasted” vote. Dr. Paul fed this perception by not stating unequivocally that he is only seeking the GOP nomination. Period. End of the discussion. The more he explained any possible third party bid, the more he used up valuable time to discuss why he is the best GOP candidate to defeat Obama.
While Paul’s remaining three opponents bash Obama 24/7 that is not his style. Instead, Dr. Paul should have taken every opportunity and should in the future explain that the bipartisan big government policies in DC will not be changed even if one of his opponents is elected.
In other words, Dr. Paul should “bash” his opponents and Obama–politely of course– for continuing the “war” on the American people’s income by supporting the FED and the income tax. He should also blast his opponents and the president for their opposition to civil liberties and giving a blank check to the military-industrial complex.
Ron Paul not only has three opponents in the GOP primary, he also is opposed by the military-industrial-congressional-lobbying-media complex. In short, every group that thrives on big government, because they earn their living from one component of the welfare-warfare state, and opposes Ron Paul’s quest to restore freedom in America. With such a powerful coalition aligned against the humble doctor from Texas, it is amazing that Ron Paul is still “standing.”
Nevertheless, Ron Paul’s place in history is secure. He has demonstrated that his legacy is intact—the liberty movement he ignited cannot be extinguished.